Search

By Prof. Srikanth Kondapalli Inscrutable China The US-China technology Cold War and China’s quest to expand indigenous capacity and self-reliance, as the US denies seeks to deny China hi-tech components for military use, are all shaping recent dynamics. The US restrictions on semiconductor components and technologies to China is a gathering storm, with retaliation and counter-retaliation measures spilling over into the supply chains and geopolitics. The ominous signals of the US restrictions on China are visible of late. It began with the Trump administration’s tariffs on China’s exports. A second sign was the semiconductor export controls imposed by the US in April 2018 on China’s telecom giant ZTE (Zhongxing) for repeatedly violating US laws on exports to Iran. A third sign was the arrest of Meng Wanzhou, the daughter of Huawei chief Ren Zhengfei. Meng was taken into custody by Canadian authorities at the behest of the US, for her alleged links to Iran. China retaliated by arresting two Canadian citizens not linked to this episode. Meng was finally released in a “hostage swap” deal, only for it to intensify the semiconductor war. The US restrictions are expected to constrain China’s expansion programmes, specifically in AI-enabled military applications, but also trigger intensive indigenous efforts. China’s vulnerability is reflected in the fact that it imports half of global chip sales, estimated at about $500 billion. China undertook two countermeasures. It retaliated by banning export of germanium and gallium to the US, essential for the production of semiconductors. Beijing also took the complaint to WTO. Previously, China banned the export of rare earth metals to Japan citing historical issues between the two countries. In another measure, it began subsidising domestic IT industry with more than $150 billion. China had assiduously built its domestic industry under Party-State dominance and priorities. Yangtze Memory Technologies Corp, Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation, HuaHong and other companies have expanded substantially in enhancing semiconductor capacity. However, despite many successes, the industry is wracked by its dependence on State subsidies, lack of R&D investments, rampant corruption, and being copycats. The Chinese countermeasures appear to be counterproductive. While China put up a brave face by announcing a 7-nanometer chip (compared to its predominantly 24-nm capability) and Huawei released the 5G-capable Mate-60 Pro. But this appears to be for demonstrative effect. The US, Taiwan and South Korean companies produce 3- and 4-nm chips already. In March this year, the US cobbled up a multilateral pact with Japan and Netherlands to stop chip-making technology from going to China. Beijing has been assiduously pursuing measures to acquire such technologies from the US and Netherlands. With ambitions of becoming a “digital superpower” and sourcing 70% of integrated circuits and other parts through the ‘Made in China 2025’ campaign launched in 2015, China wanted to seize the opportunity but with initial US support. That dream has become an uphill task now. Beijing seems to have opened its cards too early, especially at a time when it is still recovering from the Covid pandemic, with declining economic growth and restrictions on its own big businesses. China had imposed restrictions on the US company Micron and even arrested its employees last year on espionage charges. Many US tech companies are toying with the idea of relocating from China to other green pastures in Southeast Asia and India. These technology and geopolitical issues occur alongside China’s threat to invade Taiwan, the major semiconductor exporter in the world today. Taiwan invasion scenarios have created tensions in the US and Taiwan and brought back options of relocating the semi-conductor industry to other markets. Taiwan’s TSMC has agreed to open a plant in Arizona and explore other markets. Despite public postures of openness, transparency, WTO-compliance and level-playing field, China is a highly restricted market for the US, European, Japanese or even Indian products. For instance, none of the Indian software products are allowed in China’s State-owned enterprises, not to mention extensive restrictions and firewalls embedded in China’s IT platforms. The US-China semiconductor war could be an opportunity for India in terms of relocation of the global industry in a phased manner, upgradation of India’s capacities, and supply chain reorganisation. Already, Micron, which was victimised in China, is setting up a testing and packaging centre in Gujarat, with over $830 million in investments. Taiwan’s TSMC and Foxconn companies are actively in talks or have established their presence in the semiconductor industry in India. #SinoUS #TechRivalry #ChipWar #India Originally Published : Deccan Herald, 8th October' 2023 https://www.deccanherald.com/opinion/us-china-chip-war-is-indias-opportunity-2717261 Posted in SIS Blog with the Authorisation of the Author. Prof. Srikanth Kondapalli is Dean of School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

By Prof. Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit The biggest challenge for Jawaharlal Nehru University is to include the multiple intellectual narratives in India, without excluding any The goal of becoming a vishwaguru in the knowledge society requires transformational reforms in education. The National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, is indeed a unique framework, for it brings in continuity with change, and merges specialisation with a holistic approach. The stress on interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary aspects of knowledge introduces a balance between science, technology, social sciences, humanities and languages; between the local and the regional, the national and the international, as well as the universal. The State’s role in education is very important, for it is public education that bridges the gap between social, economic and regional disparities. Private players can never replace the State as the autonomy of educational institutions is guaranteed by democracies such as India. The weighty yet indispensable responsibility of fostering education and driving innovation is intricately tied to the architecture of our education system. Within this framework, the role of higher education institutions, particularly exemplified by institutions such as Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), assumes an outsized and pivotal significance. This calls for a higher investment in education by the State to more than 10 per cent of the GDP. The role ascribed to institutions of higher learning, including JNU, is to facilitate education, foster innovation, and contribute to the construction of a society characterised by openness, diversity, compassion, self-reliance, self-dignity and high-calibre competitiveness. Since its inception, JNU has been a vital chapter in India’s narrative of higher education. It has functioned as a nurturing crucible for emerging leaders across diverse domains and sectors, from politics to bureaucracy to the armed forces. It has also produced a Nobel Prize winner. Moreover, JNU has championed inclusive, democratic and creative spaces for discourse, deliberation and discussion, significantly influencing the trajectory of public debates. While we rightfully take pride in many aspects of JNU, its history, and the institution itself, some challenges demand our attention. The first challenge confronting higher education institutions in India, including JNU, revolves around enhancing their outcomes and outputs. Subsequent challenges, though relevant, complement or augment this central concern. The primary objective at JNU is to extend its impact by assuming a heightened social responsibility — cultivating a workforce that is not only characterised by parity, equity, diversity, and enhanced competitiveness but also one that wields the agency to influence and guide the global future. JNU nurtures a workforce that not only conforms to prevailing global paradigms but also possesses the capacity to shape and lead them. Failing to fulfil this pivotal mission would render JNU’s identity as a university and higher education institution incomplete. The second significant challenge is extending our outreach to marginalised and underrepresented segments of society. JNU has steadfastly positioned itself as an institution that fosters an environment conducive to the progress of women and marginalised groups. In doing this, JNU has not only propagated and extended the concept of “nari shakti” (women-led development) but has also served as an embodiment of it. In a remarkable stride, the institution has witnessed appointments of women as chairpersons and deans over the past one-and-half years as well as an increase in the number of women students during the period — a historical precedent that resonates with its commitment to equity and women’s empowerment. The third challenge revolves around infrastructural limitations. Financing remains an enduring struggle for higher education institutions worldwide, presenting fluctuations in resource availability. Though JNU faces fiscal constraints, it has adroitly harnessed technology and alternative sources of revenue to mitigate a range of deficiencies. Pioneering the landscape, JNU is set to become India’s first higher education institution with a fully operational 5G-enabled campus, exploring private-public collaboration in infrastructure development. This transformative step underscores our resolve to recalibrate ourselves and bolster competitiveness and efficiency. Such adaptations equip us to effectively address contemporary issues and anticipate the challenges of tomorrow to enable us to yield tangible outcomes. The fourth imperative is to link tradition with modernity, excellence with empathy, equality with equity and inclusion with integrity and innovation. This transition necessitates a concentrated emphasis on fostering and advancing Indian knowledge systems. The setting up of Vidyaranya Institute of Knowledge and Advance Studies (VIKAS) is a step in this direction. This includes various aspects, including the promotion of Indian languages. JNU envisions a School of Indian Languages, Culture and Civilisation to foster better understanding of each other. Under this initiative, a Centre for Tamil Language Studies has been established in JNU, and this will be followed by centres for Assamese, Odia, Kannada, and Marathi languages. While JNU is not the only entity engaged in this endeavour, it aims to assume a leadership role to actualise the visionary NEP 2020. The challenges elucidated thus far are indeed formidable, but they are not insurmountable. Nonetheless, amidst these considerations, there is also a new-found sense of optimism. We find ourselves fortunate to have access to the guidelines outlined in NEP 2020, which furnishes us with a robust blueprint. What is remarkable about NEP 2020 is that it straddles the delicate balance between a structured framework on the one hand and the flexibility to effect adaptive changes on the other. The 15 schools, 10 special centres, and our 140 affiliated defence, research, travel and tourism institutes are implementing many features of NEP 2020. The biggest challenge is to include the multiple intellectual narratives in India, without excluding any. We aim to cultivate a proficiency that attracts the world to us rather than us seeking validation from the world. Looking ahead, our strategy encompasses leveraging the prowess of our alumni network and building upon our notable achievements. Concurrently, we are committed to forging new avenues, exemplified by our emphasis on Indian knowledge systems. Our Indic civilisation State is a feminist and a nature-centric one. We celebrate the Six Ds in JNU — democracy, difference, debate, dialogue, dissent and development. They are very much a part of our values. We have students and faculty from all parts of the country working for the nation’s progress in peace and harmony. Our mission at JNU involves promoting equity with equality, intertwining tradition with modernity, seamlessly transitioning between continuity and change, harmonising the universal with the regional, and bridging the gap between theory and practice. Critics might argue that pursuing such an ambitious agenda is rife with inherent contradictions. Yet, in light of India’s current aspirations and trajectory, these ambitions are plausible and desirable. Indeed, time will substantiate the veracity of these ambitions. For such reasons, our goal is clear: We wish to become an integral contributor to India’s success story as the country inches towards its Independence centenary through innovation, inclusion, diversity, respect, and responsibility. #JNU #IndicCivilisation #NEP2020 #Diversity #Inclusion #Education Originally Published : The Indian Express, 22nd September'2023 https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/seek-world-not-its-validation-8950579/ Posted in SIS Blog with the Authorisation of the Author Prof. Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit is Vice Chancellor of the Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

By Prof. (Dr.) Gulshan Sachdeva As Ukraine's counteroffensive falters, potential for India's peace initiative emerges The war in Ukraine has again entered a new phase, with both Russia and Western powers actively reevaluating and adjusting their strategies. Despite some minor periodic gains, the widely discussed Ukrainian counteroffensive initiated in early June has not yielded significant results thus far. Russia has been able to consolidate and defend most occupied territories. In the meanwhile, Russian forces continue to target Ukrainian assets with drones and missiles. Some leaked US intelligence reports indicate that Kyiv will not be able to achieve one of the key objectives of the counteroffensive – severing Russia’s land bridge to Crimea. Numerous leaked reports and analyses offer a range of explanations for the counteroffensive's lack of success. These factors include Ukraine's overly optimistic expectations for a rapid breakthrough, insufficient Western support in terms of weaponry and training, and overly enthusiastic reports by Western media. West Tempers Its Expectations The idea of Russia’s “strategic defeat” is still alive in the Western policy circles and media. It had two major dimensions. First, isolating Russia diplomatically and squeezing Moscow economically through sanctions. Second, providing military, financial and diplomatic support including the promise of European Union membership to Ukraine. The success of the strategy depended on Ukrainian military breakthroughs on the ground and Russia’s economic isolation and collapse. On both these counts, the strategy has not been proved very effective so far. With the expectation of a quick military breakthrough fading, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg now says that “we must prepare ourselves for a long war in Ukraine”. The American strategist Edward Luttwak also asserts that the war in Ukraine “has entered its "grin and bear it" period”. It is not clear, however, if Ukraine’s Western allies are really ready for a long war. Aid To Ukraine Will Remain Generous At the moment, the Western support to Ukraine is still strong in terms of military, financial and humanitarian assistance. So far, the United States has provided $77 billion which includes $47 billion in military aid. The EU and its member states have committed altogether $140 billion including military aid since the war began in February 2022. This encompasses the Euro 50 billion new Ukraine facility announced in June and to be implemented by 2027. Military aid from Germany and the UK is about $18 billion and $7 billion respectively. Despite some signs of weakening support in a few countries like Hungary in Eastern Europe, overall European support to Ukraine is likely to continue. Only last week, Germany announced $428 million additional military support for Ukraine. President Biden has been pressing the Congress to provide an additional $24 billion aid for Ukraine. During his recent visit to Washington, Ukraine’s president Volodymyr Zelenskyy was promised additional $325 million aid including advance air defence systems. There are also discussions on providing Army Tactical Missile Systems. However, due to domestic politics and the election cycle, things are going to be less certain in the United States. Moreover, without any solid military success in Ukraine, the war fatigue may easily spread among allies. What Russia Wants Learning from its initial mistakes, Russia seems to have consolidated military gains, even amid the counteroffensive. In a changed situation, Moscow is not in favour of a ceasefire. Instead, it has provided some hints regarding how to bring an end to the conflict. During the recent press conference at the UN, the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov mentioned that 10 point peace plan prepared by Kiev is not realistic and conflict would be resolved at the battlefield, if the West sticks to this plan. But he also asserted that Russia recognised Ukrainian sovereignty way back in 1991. Apart from respect for minorities, he argues that the 1991 declaration also mentioned that “Ukraine would be a non-bloc, non-alliance country; it would not join any military alliances. In that version, on those conditions, we support Ukraine’s territorial integrity”. Put simply, Russia is willing to respect territorial integrity of Ukraine provided it promises not to join NATO. Still, there was no mention of Crimea. Obviously, these are early days for any serious discussion on the resolution. India As Mediator These developments, however, do indicate that there is a potential for a fresh diplomatic initiative to resolve the Ukrainian crisis. Amidst a changing global order, New Delhi has shown that it has the capacity, both in terms of diplomatic skills and personal relationships, to shape a compromise. This was clearly evident at the recently concluded G20 summit. Despite the world being geopolitically divided, a consensus declaration was produced. Along with some key Global South leaders, this may be an appropriate time for New Delhi to launch a fresh initiative to resolve a major geopolitical crisis of our time. #UkraineCrisis #India #GlobalSouth Originally Published : Money Control, 29th September' 2023 https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/opinion/time-for-a-negotiated-peace-in-ukraine-11448951.html Posted in SIS Blog with the Authorisation of the Author Prof. (Dr.) Gulshan Sachdeva is Professor at the Centre for European Studies and Coordinator, Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

By Md. Muddassir Quamar (PhD) A simultaneous foreign policy recalibration focused on economic considerations resulted in ‘Look East’ and ‘Look West’ policies For long since independence, India’s external approach revolved around geopolitical considerations. Decolonization, Asianism, and non-alignment defined New Delhi’s foreign relations and policies. While leaders made periodic attempts earlier, a clear shift came about only after the end of the Cold War when Prime Minister Narasimha Rao began the process of economic liberalization. A simultaneous foreign policy recalibration focused on economic considerations resulted in ‘Look East’ and ‘Look West’ policies. With trade and business taking center stage, India’s foreign relations moved away from non-alignment to multi-alignment. Nonetheless, domestic and international compulsions often led New Delhi to tread cautiously, balancing economic interest with political messaging. In relations with the Gulf and West Asia, while trade, business, and energy gradually took center stage since the 1990s, several domestic and external factors compelled New Delhi to remain cautious and, at times, indifferent to the economic potential in relation to the region. The proximity of the Gulf States to Pakistan, fascination with Iran, the lack of trust vis-à-vis the United States and European Union, strategic risks due to political instability, and security challenges meant that despite growing economic ties, India did not make efforts toward realizing the potentials in relations with the Arab Gulf countries. In the 2000s, besides trade, business, energy, and expatriates, the two sides witnessed limited issue-based cooperation, such as in fighting piracy, enhancing maritime security, and combating organized crime and terrorism. It did not, however, translate into strategic partnerships with the regional countries. In some cases, such as with Oman and Saudi Arabia, India took essential initiatives—still, these needed follow-ups, which could not be done due to domestic preoccupation or political ineptitude. Further, the obsession of the strategic community and decision-makers with Iran meant that much energy was invested in developing the Chabahar Port, which took almost a decade and a half to become functional and became mired in troubles due to US-Iran problems. Projects such as the International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC) and Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) gas pipeline were stillborn due to geopolitical challenges and inflated assumptions of economic potential. And, though New Delhi took initiatives to expedite economic engagements with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) States, such as signing the framework agreement on India-GCC free trade agreement (FTA) in August 2004, these got interrupted due to domestic problems or external factors. The India-GCC FTA negotiations stopped after two rounds in 2006 and 2008 due to differences in economic priorities. Moreover, the Middle East faced unprecedented political upheavals since 2011, resulting in New Delhi’s somewhat dispirited approach towards the region. The change of government in New Delhi in 2014 brought a shift in approach towards the Gulf and West Asia. Building on the groundwork done over the two decades, Prime Minister Narendra Modi undertook a diplomatic blitz to engage the Arab Gulf countries and Israel while also adopting a friendlier approach towards the United States, European Union, and Japan. The deterioration in relations with China due to border skirmishes (Doklam and Galwan) and the increased focus of the United States in the Indo-Pacific due to the rise of China brought a convergence of Indian interests with the United States and Japan. Economic disruptions caused by COVID-19 highlighted the need for greater economic cooperation among like-minded global powers. In the meantime, the Gulf countries, especially Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, expedited their quest for economic transformation, partly motivated by the events of the Arab Spring. The gradual change of approach towards Israel, the eventual breakthrough in the form of the Abraham Accords in September 2020, the decision to end the altercation with Qatar in January 2021 through the AlUla Declaration, and Saudi decision to renew diplomatic ties with Iran indicated the intent to focus on economic revival and avoid political instability and conflicts. The India, Israel, United Arab Emirates, and the United States (I2U2) quadrilateral initiative indicated a change in India’s approach to the Middle East, complementing bilateralism with minilateralism. Improvement in relations with Egypt and Greece underlined that India’s economic interest extends beyond the ‘extended neighborhood’. The announcement of the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEEEC) during the G20 summit in New Delhi and the enthusiastic response from the partnering countries, including Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Israel, Greece, Italy, Spain, and other members of the EU underline the significant of the proposed corridor. The possibilities of economic growth and regeneration for the three regions are notable. There are also speculations on how it can prove a competitor to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Simultaneously, the historic significance of the Gulf and West Asia region as the trading hub connecting Asia to Europe and Africa is noteworthy. In that respect, the IMEEEC represents the possibilities of reviving the centrality of the Indian Ocean region as the center of global trade, business, and mercantile activities. The trading route passing through the western Indian Ocean has a historical significance. The IMEEEC proposes an eastern corridor connecting India to the Gulf and a northern corridor connecting the Gulf to Europe. This will be complemented with a rail network connecting the east coast of the Arabian Peninsula to the Eastern Mediterranean region. The intent is to use the logistics and supply chain infrastructure coming up in the Gulf and West Asia to revive the historical trading connections between India, West Asia, and Europe. Undoubtedly, there remain challenges regarding political and security risks, the financial viability of investments in mega infrastructure projects, and the broader question of environmental hazards. However, the countries involved have already discussed these challenges and will undoubtedly examine and fine-tune them as they go forward. The resumption of India-GCC FTA negotiations is significant in this context. India and UAE signed a comprehensive economic partnership agreement in March 2022, and in November 2022, after a gap of 14 years, India revived FTA talks with the GCC. After some hiccups and a change in chief negotiator from the GCC’s side, the talks have resumed, and the sides are likely to sign a comprehensive economic partnership agreement soon. The preferential trade agreement would mean greater trade, business, and investments with the GCC countries. Notably, the Gulf and West Asia region is already the biggest trading block for India, with a US$240 billion bilateral trade in 2022-23. There is robust commodity and services trade, and with an FTA, it will likely get a boost. Thus, both the IMEEEC and India-GCC FTA are interlinked and will contribute to the success of each other. Indeed, the economic feasibility of these economic and connectivity projects are yet to be tested. These, nonetheless, show the intent of India’s economic aspirations and globalized outlook. In West Asia, it means boosting economic activities with business, trade, and investments, and connectivity projects underlining a nuanced shift in India’s approach to the region. The geopolitical risks remain but they no longer inhibit New Delhi from exploring economic possibilities and interests. The growing degree of trust and confidence between India and the Gulf countries, a sense of urgency towards economic rejuvenation at the highest level among the regional governments, and a show of intent on the part of the United States to facilitate the realization of Gulf economic visions has brought a change in how India is engaging the Gulf and West Asian countries. This is indeed the beginning of India’s geoeconomic pivot to West Asia. #WestAsia #IndianForeignPolicy #IMEEEC #NewDelhi Originally Published : The Financial Express, 18th September 2023 https://www.financialexpress.com/business/defence-indias-geoeconomic-pivot-to-west-asia-3247038/ Posted in SIS Blog with the Authorisation of the Author Md. Muddassir Quamar is an Associate Professor at Centre for West Asian Studies, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

By Prof. Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit Lord Shiva as Nataraja as the main symbol at the Bharat Mandapam shows the unity and continuity of our unbroken civilization. The roof of Peace rests upon the walls of Understanding Thiruvalluvar Through the G20+1 the Delhi Declaration, PM Modi heralded a clarion call for Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam of one earth, one family, one future—a presidency of hope, harmony, peace and stability. But here in Bharat one saw a chilling testament constructed by the colonial discourse built by Bishop Robert Caldwell, a big mentor of the Dravidian Movement, who used his knowledge of Tamil grammar to further his agenda of his evangelical mission to convert the Tamils. The same arguments put forward by him have been repeated by a young dynast Udhayanidhi, whose motto seems to be ignorance is bliss. What is a surprise is the attempt to repeat the colonial and conversion mindset that still exists, and to try and insult a faith that is practised as a way of life by 80% of the people of the state. Is this a way to dent the cultural unity of this civilizational state that has entered the fourth Industrial Revolution and declared its arrival on the world stage? The unity of ideas can be seen in that we have been one people, as reflected in the Sangam literature poem 192 in Purananuru, it gives a glimpse on the richness, maturity and wisdom of the urban culture of Tamilakam and beyond. “Every city is your city, Everyone is your kin.” This is by a people who for centuries followed a Hindu way of life. This colonial evangelical constructs being repeated by the neo-converts bring a dangerous conspiracy of creating a false reality that all other faiths are equal, when none are. One agrees that the caste system is a social evil that exists among all South Asians, irrespective of faith. It needs to be eradicated, but not by spreading militant hatred. The Keeladi excavations of the Vaigai river civilization have challenged the so-called Aryan invasion, as well the Tamil-Sanskrit divide, thereby underlining the Dravidian-Aryan divide as an ideological construct. These excavations seem to predate the Indus Valley Civilization and there is a similarity between the Tamil Brahmi and Indus Brahmi scripts. This substantiates the unity of this great civilization. Initially, it was constructed with the purpose of the 19th century evangelicals to convert during the time of Bishop Caldwell. Later it was used by the Dravidian Movement and the Dravidian political parties and are the latest post-colonial manifestation of the British colonial policy of divide and rule. Why are the same arguments constructed by Bishop Caldwell being repeated verbatim today? Are the same forces of divide-and-rule still at work owing to the failure to convert the majority in the state? The revisionist attempt to use Caldwell’s construct and mindset in free India will not work for vote bank politics. Their attempt to strip off Hindu practices in order to construct a so-called secular (in fact, an anti-Hindu) Dravidian Tamil identity seems to have failed. One such example at this continuous efforts is to depict the Hindu Tamil festival on Makara Sankranti as Tamil new year day failed, as the festival is closely rooted with the culture of the state. Likewise, attempts by international NGOs to ban Jallikattu also failed. Jallikattu is closely intertwined with Pongal and the farming community. Are the Dravidian parties blindly following the colonial evangelical construct that failed to eliminate Hinduism or Sanatan Dharma as a way of life that has no beginning or end unlike the Abrahamic faiths that are based on revelation and not through a process of evolution. Is it old wine in a new bottle to break this synergistic trinity of religious practices British colonial rule tried to do by divide and rule? They cleverly divided temple events into religious and secular functions. Then they usurped the secular functions from the temples, the centres of Hinduism to debilitate its social welfare contribution across India. Hindus are still grappling with reality and the hypocrisy of secularism in Independent India, which followed the post-colonial agenda of dividing and controlling the Hindus as the British did. Hope Bharat will give up this hypocrisy and discrimination and create a true Amrit Kaal for the 80% at both the levels of de facto and de jure. Now let us put the facts together that the divisive construction of Bishop Caldwell was done to divide and rule. Conversion was a major agenda. To further this, Caldwell constructed the divisive narrative based on Brahmins as Aryans and ethnically as foreigners who invaded from outside and ruled over the low caste indigenous Dravidians who are religiously different from high-caste Brahmins. Caldwell cloaked his conversion and divisive agenda with his unmatched scholarship of the Tamil language. He invented a new identity by coining the term “Dravidian” in his ground breaking work “A Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian or South Indian Family of Languages”, that paved the new assertion of the superiority of Tamil, independent of Sanskrit; this agenda-driven narrative inspired and continues to inspire the Dravidian movement and parties. Does the Church of South India hold the same construct by Bishop Caldwell, who as a Christian missionary wanted to prove the superiority of the Western civilization as a White man’s duty? Hinduism or Sanatan Dharma has always been a fragmented, federated religion that allowed local communities to develop and maintain their own sets of Gods, agamas, rituals, customs and worship patterns. Tamil Hindu culture is no different. Hindu society was organized around local temples with spirituality, social welfare and social practices interwoven together. The symbol of Lord Shiva as Nataraja as the main symbol at the Bharat Mandapam, where the recent G20 summit was held, brings in this unity and continuity of our unbroken civilization. Shiva’s dance has three significances, aptly brought out at the G20—the oneness of one earth, one family and one future. It is the image of Nataraja’s rhythmic play as the source of all movement within the cosmos, which is represented by the arch. The purpose of his dance is to release the countless souls of human beings from the snare of illusion. The place of the dance, Chidambaram, the centre of the universe, is in the heart every Hindu or Sanatani. The philosophical dimensions of Shiva’s dance, stands at the Amrit Kaal of Bharat, interpreting the icon of Nataraja to be the perfect combination of the mystical, philosophical and aesthetic aspects of Indian culture. The dance of Shiva relates to its cosmic significance, symbolizing the creation, maintenance and destruction of the universe and ultimately its rejuvenation. All this is symbolic of what the G20 has achieved trying to rejuvenate a polarized and divided world towards consensus. It is the signifier of cosmic activity envisaged in the five aspects [pancakritya]—srishti [creation], sthiti [maintenance], samhara [destruction], tirobhava [concealment] and anagraha [grace]. This symbol of Shiva as Nataraja are the greatest of His names, Lord of Dancers or King of Actors. At the G20 this symbol of the Hindu civilization that the cosmos is His theatre and He himself is the Actor and the Audience. The Lord of Tillai’s court performs this mystic dance and the Unmai Vilakkam, verse 36 tells us, “Creation arises from the drum; protection from the hands of hope; the foot held aloft begives release”. What Shiva creates is the manifest and unmanifest world; what He destroys are the illusory bonds that fetter not only the world at large, but every individual soul in the cosmos. All this truly symbolizes the renewed spirit of the PM Modi and a new confident, inclusive and confident Bharat. #G20 #BharatMandapam #G20India #NewDelhiLeadersDeclaration2023 Originally Published : The Sunday Guardian, 17th September, 2023 https://sundayguardianlive.com/opinion/g20-summit-showed-civilisational-unity-of-bharat#:~:text=The%20symbol%20of%20Lord%20Shiva,one%20family%20and%20one%20future. Posted on SIS Blog with the Authorization of the Author. Prof Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit is Vice Chancellor, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

By Prof. Srikanth Kondapalli The debt phenomenon is so significant that nearly half the African Union member states are in debt – mostly to the state-owned banks of China. Countries in South America and Asia are also being caught up in this debt slide. While the New Delhi G20 summit only appealed to countries to address this serious debt issue, that China is now being seen as a part of the problem seems to be hanging over it like a Sword of Damocles. As the G20 summit wound up in New Delhi on September 10, China must be pondering over the emergence of a world order that seems to be slipping from its hands. For, overcoming the tectonic East-West divide and the North-South fault lines, India is trying to bring more inclusive and multilateral regional and global orders in the post-pandemic world. By most indicators, China was at the centre of the G20 processes. Its sheer economic size of over $19 trillion and average growth of 10 percent from 1980 to 2010 and above 7 percent in the last decade have positioned China as a key player in the G20 sphere. It is one of the largest trading partners of many G20 member States, utilising all the privileges offered by the World Trade Organization. In the last two decades, China also began influencing the G20 debates on global trade, investment, financial stability, and sustainable development. China hosted the G20 at Hangzhou in 2016 and used the platform to advocate its policy priorities and interests. At this meeting, it called for financial market reforms, trade liberalisation, infrastructure investment and others. It attracted huge capital, technology and markets in the process. Testing times for Beijing However, this fairy tale seems to be ending as China has frittered away these benefits as it began showing its teeth prematurely. China’s economic growth rates fell to about 3 percent last year, partly due to its domestic economic restructuring from exports to domestic consumption, import substitution Made in China 2025 campaign and the disastrous pandemic that originated in Wuhan. Its largest trading partners began questioning China’s lack of market economy, as promised under the WTO, soft protectionist policies, non-tariff barriers and currency manipulation practices. The Covid pandemic, Ukraine conflict, US-China “decoupling”, and European “derisking” processes, in addition to other geopolitical aspects, are testing China politically. Beijing has not shown any transparent responses to these challenges, thus paving the way for others like India to emerge. Despite many objections from China and other observers, the Delhi Declaration of G20 proved to be based on everyone’s consensus. First, the statement on Ukraine, though watered down compared to the previous Bali declaration, reflected the current dynamics of the Ukraine situation. The Delhi Declaration did condemn any “territorial acquisition against the territorial integrity and sovereignty or political independence of any state” but without naming “aggression by the Russian Federation” as the Bali Declaration did a year ago. As explained by Indian External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar, the situation today has changed substantially – referring to the effects of the conflict on the vast majority of developing countries. Besides, despite a beeline of US visitors to China such as Blinken, Yellen, Kissinger and Raimondo, Beijing does not seem to have mellowed down. The Biden administration has to consider this new geopolitical situation developing around an assertive China. Subdued Chinese presence Second, China was represented at the G20 not by its President but by its Premier Li Qiang, who took over in March this year. Li made a brief speech at the G20 summit, mentioning China’s recent initiatives to build a “community of common destiny”, Global Development Initiative, Global Security Initiative and Global Civilisational Initiative, none of which were endorsed by the G20 countries that seem to be beginning to find long-term domination efforts by China through these concepts. Since the 20th Communist Party Congress last year, China’s leaders began criticising the US and others for forming “small cliques” to counter their country. Likewise, Li stated that “we must choose solidarity over division, cooperation over confrontation, and inclusiveness over exclusion”. He also asserted China will “firmly oppose the politicisation of economic and trade issues”. Li’s interactions at the G20 venue were also subdued. Li met U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, European Council President Charles Michel, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol, while the US President Joe Biden commented that they “talked about stability... it wasn't confrontational at all”. Earlier, China boycotted the G20 meetings held in Arunachal Pradesh and Srinagar and advised that the words “vasudhaiva kutumbakam” (the world is one family) be removed from the logo. President Xi Jinping’s rejection at the Johannesburg meeting of an “expeditious” disengagement of troops in India's western sector and China’s release of a map incorporating vast swathes of lands in Arunachal Pradesh and Ladakh, furthered increased the chasm between the two countries. Third, despite a planned third summit meeting of its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) next month, it may not be moving so well. The BRI began a decade ago with a unilateral agenda favouring the Communist Party-state apparatuses and businesses, and leaving no effective room for global or regional participation. On the other hand, the declaration for an India-Middle East-Europe Corridor (IMEC) has public-private partnership arrangements for all the countries on the port, road, railways and hydrogen pipelines, in addition to digital connectivity. Triggers for integration – including trade facilitation, digital tools, logistics, resilient supply chains and infrastructure on a massive scale are being planned. It was mentioned that the process would be inclusive, open, fair, secure, non-discriminatory, and address the digital divide. At the Jakarta meeting of the Southeast Asian grouping, just before the G20 meeting, Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced an “economic corridor” connecting Southeast Asia to West Asia through India. These ambitious “spice route” projects may be eclipsing the BRI. The debt crisis Fourth, China at one time supported the Third World concept and recently invested in the developing countries being a part of the BRI. But now that ground seems to be slipping for Beijing. Several Chinese commentators have expressed concern that India is taking over the “leadership of the Global South” through the G20 mobilisation. While China supported activities related to the 55-member African Union in G20 meetings, it is hard for China to digest the fact that India became instrumental in successfully pushing for the AU’s membership in the G20. Fifth, in recent times the G20 began making efforts for the “Debt Service Suspension Initiative” and “Common Framework for Debt Treatments” that aim to provide debt relief and restructuring options for heavily indebted developing countries. This is of concern for China as it has become a major lender to the Global South, often at exorbitant interest rates. For instance, bilateral debt from Chinese lenders accounts for 24 percent of Africa’s external debt, compared to 32 percent from global private sector lenders (excluding China), 16 percent from the World Bank, 19 percent from the International Monetary Fund and other multilateral institutions, and 10 percent from the Paris Club. The debt phenomenon is so significant that nearly half the African Union member states are in debt – mostly to the state-owned banks of China. Countries in South America and Asia are also being caught up in this debt slide. While the New Delhi G20 summit only appealed to countries to address this serious debt issue, that China is now being seen as a part of the problem seems to be hanging over it like a Sword of Damocles. #G20India #China #NewDelhiDeclaration Originally published: SouthAsia Monitor, 15th September' 2023 https://www.southasiamonitor.org/indo-pacific-china-watch/g20-slipping-chinas-grasp Published on SIS Blog with the Authorisation of the Author Prof. Srikanth Kondapalli is Dean of School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

By Anshu Kumar Introduction The world is 'sleepwalking into a planetary crisis’. With rising sea levels, owing to increased global temperature, multiple coastal cities around the world are headed towards submersion. Small island states in the Pacific and elsewhere are apprehensive about losing their complete existence. The climate crisis is expected to cause more than 100 million people to plunge into extreme poverty and displace more than 200 million people by 2030. Barring Iran and Poland, all the top 20 carbon-emitting countries in the world are members of the G20 grouping. The G20 grouping, comprising 80 per cent of the global GDP, 75 per cent of international trade and 60 per cent of the global population, has the financial wherewithal and material paraphernalia to pioneer a response to climate change. India, which is currently holding the G20 presidency, has the opportunity to shape global climate governance in a manner to address the issues essential for climate action. Being a member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), BRICS grouping and the QUAD, India can champion Global North-South cooperation on the issues of climate change. Climate justice and equity are insufficiently incorporated into the global climate governance process at present. India can change this in its presidency. Rationally, none of the G20 members can fight the climate crisis on its own. Each member needs to capitalise on their strengths and cooperate and share the wherewithal and paraphernalia to fight the climate monster. The Majesty of International Groupings ‘International organizations do not exist in a political vacuum’. International organisations are constituted to address the fears and challenges that states face within the international system and reflect the hopes and aspirations of the state. Multilateral fora are instituted on the belief that sovereign states cannot address the crises transcending the political boundaries of the states. In an interdependent and globalised world, the role of interstate forums has been crucial. Over one century, the growth in the number of international organisations— including a journey from traditional security-based international organisations to all sorts of non-traditional organisations— is an indication of how sovereign states have become comfortable with involving a myriad of actors from Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs), private individuals, civil societies, Multinational Corporations (MNCs), to business groups to address a labyrinth of crises faced globally. Even when there is no overarching world government, there is a ‘society of states' which, being conscious of certain common interests and common values, 'form a society in the sense that they conceive themselves to be bound by a common set of rules in their relations with one another, and share in the working of common institutions'. The idea of international society goes against the realpolitik vantage point, which either believes that international organisations are an extension of the hegemonic power or repudiates the working of such international organisations in its entirety. Hedley Bull argues that the idea of international society had always been there in the working of interstate interactions, and at no point in history did it completely disappear. Even at the height of World War II, the Allied powers continued to pay homage to the international institutional fabric to steer their relations between themselves and with other neutral countries. Even when the two superpowers were head-to-head with each other during the Cold War crises, they never broke their diplomatic relations with each other, refuted the idea of working within the ambit of common international law or withdrew recognition of each other's sovereignty. Aaron Friedberg argues that even if political relations between democracies and illiberal regimes go into disarray, there is a ‘genuine convergence of interests’ on discrete issues like climate change. It is equally pressing to assert that there are ‘issue-specific’ areas and no single state, not even the most powerful one, can entirely dominate in every area. Thus, interstate cooperation is required to deal with various issues in a myriad of domains. The idea of ‘Club Goods’ Hathaway and Shapiro recommend the idea of producing 'club goods' instead of bothering to form a universal consensus to address crises transcending political boundaries. ‘Club Goods' are non-rivalrous (like public goods) but excludable (like private goods). Consider a swimming club. Club members can enjoy swimming in their pool at the same time (non-rivalry) and can use a gate to keep non-members out (excludability)’. Global clubs are based on the idea that actors (for instance, states) choose to join a club/alliance to benefit from it and in return, they agree to comply with the condition of denying the benefits to non-members. [However, they can also deny benefits to non-compliant members in order to discipline them.] This idea of moving to clubs from decentralising global governance dates back to history. There is a long history of success in harnessing the power of numbers through a global club. In connection with the global crisis of ozone layer depletion, every state was interested in a ban on the use of Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) that included everyone but them. A global treaty would have been a fiasco with every non-compliant free riding on the compliance of honest states. The Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer (1987) assiduously created a global club. The first condition put forth for aspiring members was to reduce and ultimately phase out their consumption of CFCs. The other and most crucial condition was to trade CFCs-producing ingredients only to club members. It inferred that non-members could not buy ingredients, and thus, the cost of being left out was high. ‘The benefits of membership, and the costs of being a non-member, increased as the club got bigger’. The enforcement mechanism of global clubs requires members to report their data on compliance, and members are also able to report concerns about other members. When members fall short of complying with the conditions, there is an effort to make the pariah state return to compliance. In case of a fiasco, members issue collective sanctions and even terminate the membership of that state. Thus, the pariah state becomes bereft of privileges associated with membership. The G20 grouping, comprised of a small number of economically and politically powerful states, can create a global club to enforce measures to deal with the rising global temperature. The high cost of not being part of such clubs would compel other states to join the club and agree on the conditions to ensure measures that reduce activities, paraphernalia and processes akin to global warming. Since most of the G20 members are the top carbon-emitting countries of the world [The G20 countries alone account for more than 75 per cent of global greenhouse emissions], the most crucial decisions on climate change need to be taken among the G20 members rather than worldwide. Contrary to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) [In the UNFCCC, discarding the criteria of size, all 194 parties have an equal voice and consensus is required for decisions], the G20’s exclusive membership allows for more efficient decision-making. Any action by the G20 grouping could keep the global temperature from increasing by 2 degrees Celsius for several decades. From neorealist parlance, it is the most powerful countries that shape the course of international systems. Thus, once the G20 members, including states from almost every region, set the course of action related to climate change, the rest countries would follow suit. It has become a trend for international organisations to be used as a forum for politicising world events by great powers. India’s G20 presidency has, too, faced such push and pull on the Ukraine crisis. However, it is crucial for the state actors to depoliticise the G20 groupings, at least on matters of 'planetary concerns.' It should be equally pressing for the world powers to look into the non-traditional issues of the day that are slowly eating the natural fabric of the planet Earth. #PlanetaryCrisis Originally Contributed for the SIS Blog. Anshu Kumar is a Master’s student at the School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. His research interest lie in India’s relations with great powers, the rise of China in the international system, strategic studies, and Indian foreign policy.

By Prof Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit Public education bridges the gap of social, economic and regional disparities. The motto of Excellence with Empathy, Equality with Equity and Inclusion with Integrity and Innovation is even more relevant today. The reason being the spate of suicides by promising young men and women, especially from the marginalized groups—this is extremely distressing to say the least. Higher education institutions need to address this issue urgently for there seems to be a lack of empathy, equality and inclusion. It is necessary that all stakeholders need to build this sense of belonging. We need to learn from each other, especially the best practices in empathy, equality and inclusion. These academic spaces need to be created and strictly practised. The goal of becoming a Vishvaguru, a leader in the knowledge society requires transformational reforms in education. The NEP 2020 is indeed a unique framework, for it brings in continuity with change, realm with region and holism with specialization. The stress is on interdisciplinary and multi-disciplinary aspects of knowledge, balance between science, technology, social sciences, humanities and languages. A touch of the local, regional with the national and international as well as the universal. The State’s role in education is very important, for it is public education that bridges the gap of social, economic and regional disparities. Private players can never replace the State, as the autonomy of educational institutions is guaranteed by a democratic state like India. Undertaking the weighty yet indispensable responsibility of embracing the endeavour of learning, fostering education, and driving innovation are intricately tied to the architecture of our education system. Within this framework, the role of higher education institutions, particularly exemplified by institutions like JNU, assumes an outsized and pivotal significance. This calls a higher investment in education by the State to more than 10% of the GDP. Political power without narrative power is like a directionless ship. Science and technology are just instruments, and a narrative architecture built and nurtured by political power with economic and social power will enhance the longevity of any political regime. NEP 2020 is a visionary document that has given HEIs the opportunity to be flexible, experiment and be more inclusive. Once a student is able to gain admission into the top HEIs the feeling of belonging need to be created by the faculty and the seniors, isolation and competition need to be replaced by empathy, learning and mindfulness. Instead of declaring a student a failure in a format of examination, need not be the last word on his/her abilities. The greatest mathematician, Srinivasa Ramanujan failed to clear his higher secondary. It is not only an issue of mental illness, but the environment that creates it. HEIs need to give that ray of hope to all. HEIs need to talk to each other to resolve these issues and create unalienating spaces. The designated role ascribed to institutions of higher learning, including JNU, is to facilitate education, foster innovation, and contribute to the construction of a society characterized by openness, diversity, compassion, self-reliance, self-dignity and high-caliber competitiveness. From its inception, JNU has been a vital chapter within India’s narrative of higher education. It has functioned as a nurturing crucible for emerging leaders across diverse domains and sectors, ranging from the political sphere to the realm of bureaucracy, the armed forces and two Noble Prize winners. Moreover, JNU has fervently championed inclusive, democratic and creative spaces for discourse, deliberation and discussion significantly influencing the trajectory of public debates. While we rightfully take pride in many aspects of JNU, its history, and the institution itself, some challenges demand our attention. The first challenge confronting higher education institutions in India, including JNU, revolves around enhancing their outcomes and outputs. Subsequent challenges, though relevant, complement or augment this central concern. The primary objective at JNU is to extend its impact by assuming a heightened social responsibility—cultivating a workforce that is not only characterized by parity, equity, diversity, and enhanced competitiveness but also wields the agency to influence and guide the global trajectory. JNU’s pivotal role lies in nurturing a workforce that not only conforms to prevailing global paradigms but also possesses the capacity to shape and lead them. This commitment to proactive influence and guidance represents an imperative. Failing to fulfill this pivotal mission would render JNU’s identity as a university and higher education institution incomplete. How to incorporate Industry -University cooperation for skill enhancement. The second significant challenge pertains to extending outreach to marginalized and underrepresented segments of society. JNU has steadfastly positioned itself as an institution fostering an environment conducive to the progress of women and marginalized groups. In doing this, JNU has not only propagated and extended the concept of “Nari Shakti” (women led development)but has also served as a living embodiment of it. In a remarkable stride, the institution has witnessed the appointments of women as chairpersons and Deans over the past one and a half years—a historical precedent that resonates with its commitment to equity and women’s advancement and empowerment. With increase in the number of girl students and women faculty in the last year and half. The third challenge revolves around infrastructural limitations. Financing remains an enduring struggle for higher education institutions worldwide, presenting fluctuations in resource availability. JNU faces fiscal constraints, yet it has adroitly harnessed technology and alternative sources of revenues to mitigate a range of deficiencies. Pioneering the landscape, JNU is set to become India’s first higher education institution with a fully operational 5G-enabled campus and exploring the Private -public collaboration in infrastructure development. This transformative step underscores our resolve to recalibrate ourselves, bolstering competitiveness and efficiency. Such adaptations equip us to effectively address contemporary issues and anticipate the challenges of tomorrow, yielding tangible outcomes. The fourth imperative is how to link tradition with modernity, excellence with empathy, equality with equity and inclusion with integrity and innovation. This transition necessitates a concentrated emphasis on fostering and advancing Indian Knowledge Systems. The setting up of Vidyaranya Institute of Knowledge Advance Studies {VIKAS} as a step in this direction. This includes various aspects, including the promotion of Indian languages. JNU envisions a “School of Indian Languages, Culture and Civilization” to foster better understanding of each other. Under this initiative, a Center for Tamil Language Studies has been established in JNU that is poised to be joined by the Assamese, Odia, Kannada, and Marathi languages. While JNU is not the singular entity engaged in this endeavor, it aims to assume a leadership role to actualize the visionary NEP 2020. The biggest challenge is the existence of multiple narratives in the Indian intellectual horizons with excluding any. We aim to cultivate a proficiency that attracts the world to us rather than us seeking validation from the world. Looking forward, our strategy encompasses leveraging the prowess of our alumni network and building upon our notable achievements. Concurrently, we are committed to forging novel avenues of contribution, exemplified by our emphasis on Indian Knowledge Systems. Indic Civilization state is a Feminist and a nature centric one. We celebrate Six Ds in JNU- Democracy, Difference, Debate, Dialogue, Dissent and Development, very much part of our values. We have students and faculty from all parts of the country working for the nation’s progress in peace and harmony. #NEP2020 #AmritKaal #PublicEducation #6Ds #HigherEducation #JNU Originally Published : The Sunday Guardian, 10th September, 2023 https://sundayguardianlive.com/opinion/challenges-to-higher-education-in-amrit-kaal Posted in SIS Blog with the authorization of the author. Prof Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit is Vice Chancellor, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

By Prof. Swaran Singh The geopolitics of expanding East-West polarisation and persistent North-South divide provided an acid test for India’s leadership and it has come out quite successful in converting those challenges into opportunities as well. The G20 Presidency has provided India with great opportunity to better engage with the world as also prepare its own citizens for its ever expanding role as global leader. For G20 as well, India has showcased its strong credentials to lead this most powerful body in global governance especially for the macro-management of global economic trends. The geopolitics of expanding East-West polarisation and persistent North-South divide provided an acid test for India’s leadership and it has come out quite successful in converting those challenges into opportunities as well. To begin with, G20 is a group of world’s largest economies and India has come to be recognised as world’s fastest growing economy amongst these large economies. Looking at top five economies in year 2023, the United States has been growing at 1.8% followed by China at 4%, Japan at 1.7%, Germany at 2.6% while India has marked its current growth rate at 7.2%. Plus India’s demographic dividend — of median age of 28.8 years — has witnessed continuous rise in its trade and foreign direct investments that also posit confidence in India emerging as major contributor to global growth trends. In wake of geopolitics increasingly circumventing consensus building in recent G20 presidencies, India’s policy of multi-alignment — that seeks to build partnerships in as many sectors with as many countries as possible while ensuring strategic autonomy — has witnessed India being one of the few that have been able to sustain position of neutrality in ongoing Ukraine crisis. India is among few nations that have been able to build strong partnership with most of the major powers, also with emerging economies and least developed nations. India remains continually engaged with both the United States and its friends as also with China-Russia and their friends. It is part of Quadrilateral Security Framework but also part of BRICS and SCO groupings. This makes India perhaps ideal candidate to ensure cohesion in increasingly polarising global governance. India’s has accordingly demonstrated its heft in showcasing its vision, versatility and vigour by raising several benchmarks to make 18th G20 presidency of 2023 unprecedented by achieving several firsts. At the most visible level never before G20 witnessed so many and such large gatherings as this year: India’s presidency saw 220 meetings being convened in 60 cities across every province and union territory of India. It brought over 100,000 delegates debating on multiple themes at multiple levels while experiencing India first hand. These also resulted in adding a whole range of new themes in their parleys and in producing most voluminous recommendations. This has provided India opportunity to further engage its own citizens and raise their awareness about India’s changing global role and stature; and responsibilities that will accrue from such transformation. This remains a prerequisite for any emerging power to build strong domestic constituencies for its global leadership. Foreign policy is nothing but an extension of domestic politics and voters must support their national leaders’ indulgences with issues that may have only an indirect impact of lives. As Indian leaders begin to invest greater attention and resources in addressing global challenges, G20 presidency provided an ideal opportunity to connect India’s foreign policy goals with aspirations of Indian citizens. But India’s contribution to G20 in 2023 remains much deeper. The most salient has been India’s focus to bring ‘Global South’ issues and perspectives to the centre-stage of these deliberations. Within weeks of taking of G20 presidency in December last year, January this year saw India convene the Voce of the Global South Summit that was attended by delegations from 125 nations. This has ignited greater interest of several other international forums in engaging nations of Global South thereby contributing to term ‘Global South’ shedding its pejorative pretences and be seen as nomenclature for evolving solidarity of nations of Asia, Africa and Latin America. India also stands reassured of Global South continuing to stay at the helm with nations of Global South — Indonesia (2022), India (2023), Brazil (2024), South Africa (2025) — continuously holding G20 presidency in coming years as well. G20 that had expanded from G7 grouping of most advanced industrialised nations has gradually changed its character. To begin with following the collapse of former Soviet Union, Russia was co-opted to make it G8 but that was soon replaced by G7 coopting some of the nations that later came to be known as BRICS as Observers. There were two milestones marking this transition. First, the East Asian financial crisis of 1997 had triggered finance ministers’ meetings of top twenty economies. Then these parleys were upgraded to its current G20 national leaders summit following the global economic crisis of 2008. Nevertheless, for long, the G7 had continued to define the essential character of G20 as market- and profit-driven, striving for material growth rates which now stand challenged as a sustainable model. The fundamental change triggered by co-option of the nations of Global South in G20 has been in accelerating a fundamental shift from growth to sustainable development. This has also sought to make G20 more inclusive in its vision and initiatives. Most important, G20 parleys have emerged out of largely close-door confabulations of celebrated economists, policy wonks, national leaders into what Indian prime minister calls a ‘People’s Festival’ seeking human-centric development. In this piecemeal changing of the style and substance of G20, India has made a seminal contribution by accelerating this transformation. This realisation has also gradually dawned on world leaders that urbanisation- and industrialisation-driven globalisation has accentuated the gulf between rich and poor within and between nations. What India’s foreign minister calls re-globalisation seeks to prioritise on sustainable development by making it inclusive of the nations of the Global South that have so far been on the receiving end of various emerging global challenges like climate crisis. Accordingly, the themes that 2023 has seen coming to the forefront include issues like millets, agriculture and food security, traditional medicine, biofuels, women-led development, climate finance, digital public infrastructure and so on. India has been able to generate consensus on large number these issues at various levels and many of these may also achieve consensus at the summit level. Finally, true to its civilisation ethos, India sees its presidency as part of an ongoing process in which summit 2023 is but one important event. Also, India’s presidency continues for eighty-one days beyond the 2023 summit. Plus given the Troika Leadership format of the G20 — where preceding, current, and next presidencies work in tandem at all levels — India will continuing to be at the steering wheel for next year as well. From this perspective, India remains committed to continue to work on issues on which consensus may be built during India’s presidency or later in subsequent years. The fact that India is all set to emerge from currently being world’s fifth largest to world’s third largest economy is also bound to add to its influence and aura on global governance enabling it to make a seminal contribution in making G20 inclusive, representative and effective in its endeavours. #G20 #G20Summit2023 #GlobalSouth #India Originally published: International Affairs Review, September 8, 2023. http://internationalaffairsreview.com/2023/09/08/g20-presidency-an-opportune-moment-for-india/ Posted in SIS Blog with the authorization of the author. Swaran Singh is visiting professor at the University of British Columbia, fellow of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute in Calgary, Alberta, and professor of diplomacy and disarmament at the School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

By Dr. Jajati K. Pattnaik This maiden expedition to the lunar south pole is going to empower India with critical information in space research and secure a firm place among the elite nations that compete to exercise their deep presence in space. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s address to the nation from Johannesburg in the immediate aftermath of Chandrayaan-3’s historic soft landing in the south pole of the Moon aptly alludes to the ‘Global South’. This is no doubt a remarkable feat achieved by a nation from the global south which has experienced a couple of centuries of British colonisation. To be the fourth country to have sent a space mission to the Moon after the US, Russia and China and to be the first country to have sent its spacecraft to the south of the Moon is an incredible accomplishment by India. Soft landing on the south pole of the Moon where the temperature may sink 230 degrees Celsius and mostly dark in the absence of sunlight is a difficult enterprise but this illustrates the depth of Indian engineering and space research. This develops a great deal of enthusiasm for nations in the Global South, and India becomes a nation that inspires a multitude of nations. The grit, resilience, and courage with which India has emerged from its colonial past form an inspiring story that shapes the imagination of success for many nations in the Global South. The reference made in PM Modi’s speech is a subtle call to the Global South to awaken from the colonially induced lethargy, and India takes the lead to shake off the invisible yokes. This enhances India’s prestige in the Global South and gives the former a leadership role. The attitudinal shift that India inspires naturally attracts allies to ensure India’s rise in the soft power sphere. The cutting-edge research that India is expected to conduct on the Moon is also going to help in several ways to the developing countries. In the age of Artificial Intelligence, Information Technology and Space Research, the countries that have established their strength in these areas are going to make a difference and determine the nature of the global order. The successful landing of Chandrayaan-3 on the Moon’s surface will help India acquire information about the nature and features of the Moon and its metal and mineral constitutions, the possibility of life and bacterial formations, vegetation, etc. The importance of India, in this connection, is going to enhance globally as a nation with a difference. India’s democratic political culture and its ethos of friendship and cooperation are going to be its soft power assets to make more collaboration with NASA and other international organisations to add more critical layers to space research. This achievement will encourage a deeper ISRO-NASA research engagement. With the deployment of critical technology, the research on the Moon may arrive at some breakthroughs that may enhance the scope of the probability of life on the Moon. India’s soft power through space research is going to take a very defined shape. This historic mission to the south of the Moon is just the end of the beginning. The real and challenging task lies ahead regarding its function on the moon’s surface to procure critical data for major research to take place. The Chandrayaan-1 gave India the breakthrough of exploring frozen water on the Moon. The Chandrayaan-3 is expected to examine the soil on the moon and measure its density and contents. The nature of metal and mineral compositions in the Lunar soil and rock is one of the significant objectives of the mission. The spacecraft is equipped with high-tech instruments which are capable of high-end experiments and analysis. The instruments such as RAMBHA and the Langmuir Probe sent in the module are going to play a key role in observing the plasma activities on the lunar surface. The research effort would be to understand the nature of the ion and electron particles. The thermal properties of the soil and other related constituents are going to be the key focus of this lunar expedition. NASA’s payload accommodated in the module is the LASER Retroreflector Array which is going to give measurement-related breakthroughs regarding the distance between the earth and the moon and the lunar orbital behaviours. This information will help in a crucial way to understand the behaviour of the earth. This will enable scientists to make precise predictions about different geological or seismic activities. In addition, the other two critical instruments namely the Alpha Particle X-ray Spectrometer (APXS) and Laser Induced Breakdown Spectroscope (LIBS) are designed to examine the properties of the lunar topsoil. This may lead to the exploration of the history and evolution of the moon. This along with a host of other reasons creates a compelling case for India’s soft power ascendancy on the global platform. This maiden expedition to the lunar south pole is going to empower India with critical information in space research and secure a firm place among the elite nations that compete to exercise their deep presence in space. India, in this direction, has put dedicated efforts into establishing its position as one of the impactful players in space technology and exploration. Its space-tech ecosystem and enthusiastic and sustained entrepreneurial interest in it are going to make India a hub of space research and technology. For this purpose, there are over 140 space-tech start-ups have organised their efforts to take India to a different level in space science. The success of the Chandrayaan-3 explains the top standard of Indian space technology. This will attract more investment in space engineering. The cost-effective model that India has pioneered through its Chandrayaan-3 constitutes a central motif for definitive investment. This is going to add more energy to the Indian economy. This will also generate a scope of employment for the Indian youth. The space economy may also emerge as a catalyst for diversifying India’s economic imagination. India will definitely gain strong soft power leverage across the globe and a substantive place in the space league. #Chandrayaan3 #ISRO #Space #GlobalSouth Originally Published : The FirstPost, 24th August, 2023 https://www.firstpost.com/opinion/how-chandrayaan-3-gives-india-an-inspirational-role-in-future-space-endeavours-of-global-south-13035982.html Posted on SIS Blog with the authorisation of the Author Dr Jajati K Pattnaik is an Associate Professor at Centre for West Asian Studies, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

By Prof. Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit While the origin of democracy is usually credited to the British as the Magna Carta came into existence, the earlier inscription of Uthiramerur in Tamil Nadu had a vivid and detailed picture of democracy, said Jawaharlal Nehru University Vice-Chancellor Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit here on Tuesday. She delivered a lecture on ‘India and G20’ at Madurai Kamaraj University. She said the theme of the G20 Summit in India in September 2023, Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam meant ‘One Earth, One Family, One Future’. The theme also had its roots in Tamil Sangam period work Purananuru, she said. She said there were illustrious Nobel Laureates from Tamil Nadu. This motivated young students to become responsible citizens. Referring to the success of ISRO’s third lunar mission Chandrayaan-3, she said that she took pride in the contribution made by women towards the overall development of the country. Registrar M. Ramakrishnan, Syndicate Members S. Nagarathinam and S. Pushparaj were present. Head of the Department of Political Science D. Ramakrishnan welcomed the gathering and Head of the Department of Sociology P. Rajkumar proposed a vote of thanks. Originally Published : The Hindu, 29th August, 2023 https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Madurai/g20-summit-theme-has-roots-in-sangam-literature-says-jnu-vice-chancellor/article67249577.ece Posted in SIS Blog with the authorization of the author. Prof Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit is Vice Chancellor, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

By Prof. Gulshan Sachdeva The recent weaponisation of the global financial system by the West has alarmed the Global South, and re-invigorated BRICS The recently concluded 15th BRICS summit in South Africa has decided to invite six countries viz. Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates as full members. They will join Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa from January 1, 2024. This is only the first phase of the extension. South African President Cyril Ramaphosa declared that “other phases will follow”. Although the issue of BRICS expansion has been pending for some time, the quick inclusion of six countries is remarkable. At first glance, expansion may indicate a strong China-Russia imprint. However, five out of six new members have also established strategic partnerships with India; and New Delhi has a strong development partnership with Ethiopia. As per the summit declaration, a consensus “on the guiding principles, standards, criteria and procedures” for the expansion has been agreed. As this is an internal document, we may have to wait for the details. However, it is likely that a few more countries may join at the Kazan summit in Russia in 2024. There was always a certain interest in a few countries to join the grouping. The recent weaponisation of the global financial system by the West has alarmed most countries in the South, which are looking for alternatives. With more key non-Western countries joining the grouping, BRICS may slowly emerge as a potential alternative, at least in certain economic matters. The BRIC started as an economic grouping. Although evolving global geopolitics has clearly influenced BRICS’ functioning, there is still certain geo-economic logic in the latest expansion. The expansion is energy-centric and West Asian centric. In 2022, six out of 10 top oil producers in the world were from the expanded BRICS. They produced 30 per cent of the total global oil output. This included Saudi Arabia (12 per cent), Russia (11 per cent), China (5 per cent), Brazil, the UAE and Iran (4 per cent each). Similarly, China, India, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Brazil consumed about 30 per cent of the global oil produced. Many countries, including India, China, Russia, Iran, and the UAE, are already doing some of their energy transactions in local currencies. Currently, most of these transactions are bilateral. India has also used the UAE dirham and Chinese yuan to pay for Russian oil imports. Since policy makers from these countries will be meeting regularly in different BRICS meetings, they may work out a multilateral mechanism to deal with energy transactions in their own currencies. With more and more countries joining, BRICS would obviously be no longer a grouping with mainly economic underpinnings. It will become a strong non-Western geopolitical organisation with the aim of strengthening a multipolar world order. With more countries with different foreign policy orientations joining BRICS, the charge of an anti-US grouping may also weaken. China-Russia-Iran may have a strong anti-US stance. The same cannot be true for India, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE. This feeling was clearly expressed by Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva when he asserted that "we do not want to be a counterpoint to the G7, G20 or the United States …we just want to organize ourselves." Being the largest economy and a major trading partner of all BRICS members, China is likely to have a bigger clout within the grouping. Therefore, many in the West may consider an expanding BRICS as one of the long term Chinese strategies being implemented for a Beijing-centric order. However, it may not be easy for any one country in the grouping, even for China, to influence so many big and diverse countries easily. So, the effectiveness of the grouping will continue to be a challenge. It was already being mocked by many as merely as a talking shop. However, eagerness of so many diverse countries to join the grouping indicates its relevance. The world order is changing. The ineffectiveness of existing multilateral organisations including the UNSC and WTO is evident. No one country including the United States or China has the capacity to singlehandedly lead the world. In the current geopolitical setting, the BRICS expansion will provide immediate comfort to China, Russia, and Iran. But in the medium run, the expanded BRICS will help strengthen multipolarity, despite its imperfections. It may also have the potential to provide some of the answers to current global governance flaws. #BRICS #Expansion #GlobalSouth #Multipolarity #GlobalGoverance Originally Published : Deccan Herald, on 28th August, 2023 https://www.deccanherald.com/opinion/despite-imperfections-brics-11-will-strengthen-multipolarity-2663185 Posted in SIS Blog with the authorisation of the Author. Prof. Dr. Gulshan Sachdeva is Professor, Centre for European Studies and Coordinator, Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India